Donor Sibling Registry

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the US non-profit group. For methods of donor registration and related international laws, see Donor registration.
Donor Sibling Registry
Type 501(c)(3) nonprofit
Industry

Charity

revenue = Increase$195,514 USD (2013)
Founded Nederland, Colorado, USA (September, 2000)
Headquarters Nederland, Colorado, USA
Key people Wendy Kramer, Director & Co-founder
Ryan Kramer, Co-founder
Products Service
Employees The DSR is run solely by its two founders.

The Donor Sibling Registry is a website and non-profit US organization serving donor offspring, sperm donors, egg donors and other donor conceived people. It was founded in September 2000 by a mother and son team, Wendy Kramer and Ryan Kramer of Nederland, Colorado. As of March 2014, the site is home to more than 40,500 members including sperm/egg donors, recipient parents and donor conceived people.

Purpose and goals[edit]

The "DSR" was developed as a means of connecting people born through donor insemination. It is based on the idea that when a child is born through donor insemination, they are given a "donor number" corresponding to the person they anonymously received a sperm or egg donation from. Because a donor can donate multiple times, often two or more children are created from the same donor. When multiple user sign up with the same donor, a "match" is created. Most commonly, matches are made between half-siblings of sperm donation, however there are numerous cases of donor-offspring matches as well.

History[edit]

The DSR began as a Yahoo! group, which was created in September 2000. It was started by Wendy Kramer and her then 10-year-old son Ryan Kramer as a means of communicating with other offspring of artificial insemination. After the first year, the group was home to only 37 members. In October, 2002, Wendy created a press release which was sent to local news agencies. The story was picked up by Denver's NBC affiliate, KUSA-TV. Shortly after, a small article about the DSR was written for The Denver Post. This article led to national and international media coverage, giving the DSR enough exposure to grow its member base into the thousands. In October 2003, the DSR moved from a Yahoo group to its own database website. With the help of continued media coverage, the DSR is home to more than 39,000 people (donors, parents and the donor conceived themselves) (as of April 2013). Although the DSR Yahoo! group no longer handles connections (this is done by the website itself), it still exists as a place for discussion.

Matches[edit]

When a donor conceived person, a parent of a donor conceived person or a sperm or egg donor signs up to the Donor Sibling Registry, they are automatically filed under their respective facility/clinic/cryobank by their donor number. If only one person of a donor number is listed, the posting is white. When two or more people sign up under the same donor number, they are filed together as a "match". Matches can occur between half siblings (light yellow), sperm donors and their offspring (dark yellow), or egg donors and their offspring (also dark yellow). As of March 2014, the total number people matched on the DSR is 11,050, although many more unrecorded matches exist. The largest match between half siblings totals more than 175. The largest match between a registered DSR donor and offspring is 75 half siblings to a single donor, who is also listed.

See 9/11 NY Times Article: "One Sperm Donor, 150 Offspring"

Research[edit]

Published Research:

For all published research, see the Research page on the Donor Sibling Registry website. This is a partial listing only.

2013 Social Science and Medicine: Donor-Conceived Offspring Conceive of the Donor: The Relevance of Age, Awareness, and Family Form. Rosanna Hertz (Wellesley College), Margaret K. Nelson (Middlebury College), Wendy Kramer (Donor Sibling Registry).

This paper discusses how the age at which offspring learned about their donor conception and their current age each make a difference in their responses to what they want from contact with their donor. Family form (heterosexual- two parent families and lesbian-two parent families) also affects donor terminology. The role of the genetic father is reconsidered in both types of families. The donor, an imagined father, offers clues to the offspring’s personal identity. The natal family is no longer the sole keeper of identity or ancestry.

2012 Reproductive BioMedicine Online: Semen donors who are open to contact with their offspring: issues and implications for them and their families Authors: Ken Daniels, Wendy Kramer and Maria Perez-y-Perez 10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.09.009. [Epub ahead of print] In Press. Excerpt: This study investigates the motivations, views and experiences of semen donors willing to have contact with their offspring. Contact in donor insemination has usually been thought of and seen as a coming together of the donor and the offspring – just two people. The results of this study show that there is a need to think of offspring and donor linking as a coming together of two families.

2012 Reproductive BioMedicine Online: Perspectives, experiences and choices of parents of children conceived following oocyte donation Authors: Eric Blyth, Wendy Kramer, Jennifer Schneider 10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.10.013 [EPub ahead of print]. In Press, to be published February 2013. Excerpt: This paper reports on and discusses the findings of an online survey initiated by the Donor Sibling Registry of 108 parents of children conceived following oocyte donation. Around half of the parents subsequently wished they had used an open-identity donor.

The survey revealed considerable variations in respondents’ experiences of clinic practices regarding the availability of counseling, information provided about choice of donor type, advice regarding disclosure and the reporting of births, indicating keys areas for improved professional practice.

2012 Asia Pacific Journal of Reproduction: Donor type and parental disclosure following oocyte donation Authors: John Stephenson, Eric Blyth, Wendy Kramer, Jennifer Schneider (2012) 39-45. Volume 1, Number 1 This study explores the attitudes of parents of children conceived via oocyte donation regarding disclosure of the nature of their conception to their children. Excerpt: Parental use of an anonymous or open-identity donor … makes very little difference to the timing of parental disclosure to their donor-conceived child about their conception. The median age of children at disclosure is about 3½ years; UK/Australian parents seem more ready to tell their children at an early stage … than North American parents …, although about three quarters of all children have been told by the age of six years. Considerable ambiguity among parents who intend to disclose to their children as to the optimal age of disclosure is evidenced.

2012 Reproductive BioMedicine Online: Forming a family with sperm donation: a survey of 244 non-biological parents Authors: Lucy Frith, Neroli Sawyer, Wendy Kramer (2012) 24, 709–718 This paper discusses the issues of selecting a donor, attitudes towards anonymity, disclosure to the donor-conceived child, and policy recommendations. Excerpt: This paper reports the results of a survey of non-biological mothers and fathers. … Certain issues and concerns associated with not being genetically related to their offspring were experienced differently by men and women. However, there were many important areas of common ground: a concern for getting a healthy donor, the importance of matching the donor to the non-biological partner, and the amount of thought that went into selecting the donor.

This [study] found that ‘health items’ were less important than physical attributes, character descriptors and donors’ physical and psychological match to the recipient’s partner when choosing a donor.

2011 Human Reproduction: Offspring searching for their sperm donors: how family type shapes the process Authors: Diane Beeson, Wendy Kramer, Patricia K. Jennings doi:10.1093/humrep/der202 Excerpt: This study examines the findings from the largest survey to date of donor-inseminated (DI) offspring and focuses on respondents’ learning of the method of their conception and their desire to contact their donor.

Offspring of lesbian parents learned of their DI origins at earlier ages than offspring of heterosexual parents. In the latter families, disclosure tended to occur earlier in single-parent than in dual-parent families. Disclosure was most likely to be confusing to offspring of heterosexual parents, particularly when it occurred at an older age. The vast majority of offspring in all types of families desired contact with their donor; however, comfort in expressing curiosity regarding one’s donor was lowest in dual-parent heterosexual families, with about one-quarter reporting an inability to discuss their origins with their social father.

2010 Human Reproduction: Sperm and oocyte donors’ experiences of anonymous donation and subsequent contact with their donor offspring Authors: Tabitha Freeman, Vasanti Jadva, Wendy Kramer and Susan Golombok (2011) Vol.26, No.3 pp. 638–645, 2011 Excerpt: This study examined the motivations and experiences of anonymous donors who decide to make themselves open to contact with their donor offspring.

Donors’ main reasons for donating were financial payment and wanting to help others. The majority of sperm donors and more than one-third of oocyte donors expressed concerns about the well-being of any children conceived using their gametes and not being able to make contact with them. Most sperm and oocyte donors felt that it was important to know how many offspring had been born using their donation … All of the donors who had contact with their donor offspring reported positive experiences and the majority continued to have regular contact.

2010 Reproductive BioMedicine Online: Experiences of offspring searching for and contacting their donor siblings and donor Authors: Vasanti Jadva1, Tabitha Freeman, Wendy Kramer, and Susan Golombok (2010) 20, 523– 532 This paper was nominated for the 2011 Robert G. Edwards Prize Paper Award This study looks at the experiences of donor-conceived individuals who are searching for and/or contacting their donor and/or donor siblings. The paper focuses on searching for genetic relatives, telling others about their search and the reactions to that information, reasons for searching, and the frequency and experience of contact. Excerpt: Differences were found according to family type and age of disclosure. Fewer offspring from heterosexual couple families had told their father about their search when compared with offspring from lesbian couple families who had told their co-parent. Offspring who had found out about their conception after age 18 were more likely to be searching for medical reasons, whereas those who had found out before age 18 tended to be searching out of curiosity.

2009 Human Reproduction: The experiences of adolescents and adults conceived by sperm donation: comparisons by age of disclosure and family type Authors: Vasanti Jadva1, Tabitha Freeman, Wendy Kramer, and Susan Golombok doi:10.1093/humrep/dep110 This study examines the views of offspring who are aware of the nature of their conception. It reveals the differences in the experience of those who were told during childhood compared to those who found out during adulthood. Excerpt: Offspring of single mothers and lesbian couples learned of their donor origins earlier than offspring of heterosexual couples. Those told later in life reported more negative feelings regarding their donor conception than those told earlier. … Offspring from heterosexual-couple families were more likely to feel angry at being lied to by their mothers than by their fathers. The most common feeling towards fathers was ‘sympathetic’.

Age of disclosure is important in determining donor offspring’s feelings about their donor conception. It appears it is less detrimental for children to be told about their donor conception at an early age.

2009 Human Reproduction: Gamete donation: parents’ experiences of searching for their child’s donor siblings and donor Authors: Tabitha Freeman, Vasanti Jadva, Wendy Kramer and Susan Golombok (2009) volume 24, issue 3, pages 505-516; doi:10.1093/humrep/den469 This study investigates the experience of parents of donor offspring searching for and contacting their child’s donor and/or donor siblings. Excerpt: Parents’ principal motivation for searching for their child’s donor siblings was curiosity and for their donor, enhancing their child’s sense of identity. Some parents had discovered large numbers of donor siblings. Most parents reported positive experiences of contacting and meeting their child’s donor siblings and donor.

This study highlights that having access to information about a child’s donor origins is important for some parents and has potentially positive consequences.

2009 Human Reproduction: US oocyte donors: a retrospective study of medical and psychosocial issues Authors: Wendy Kramer; Jennifer Schneider and Natalie Schultz doi: 10.1093/humrep/dep309 Excerpt: First-person reports of oocyte donors, years after their donation, can give valuable information about medical complications of oocyte donation, as well as changes potentially required in procedures and priorities of US-based in vitro fertilization (IVF) centers.

Many, who did not report [updated medical] information, did not realize they could or should. Donors said that they frequently had not sought information about pregnancy outcomes because of confusion about the definition of ‘anonymity’ or ‘confidentiality’.

Media appearances[edit]

The DSR has made numerous appearances on various local, national and international television, radio, newspaper and magazine segments including The Oprah Winfrey Show, Good Morning America, The New York Times and many more.

References[edit]